The New York Times' acclaimed and assailed FiveThirtyEight blogger, who analyzes polls with his way-cool special algorithm, has been telling us for some time that President Barack Obama was going to win a second term.

This brought him all sorts of opprobrium from conservatives livid that he could be so blithely be predicting certain victory for the beleaguered incumbent when polls showed Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney were virtually tied in the popular vote.

But the critics were totally missing the point. Elections in this country are decided by the meshuganah electoral college. And those swing state polls were making it clear, although by the narrowest of margins, that Obama was going to once again be the One.

Silver, and much of the mainstream media, got it right. The polls were tight, but the analysis suggested correctly that Obama was going to win again. The much-maligned narrative wasn't "skewed" — it was on target.

The obsessive focus on polls this time around was no doubt over the top. But given the tightness of the election, the intense passions surrounding it and insatiable thirst of so many to know who was going to win, I'm not sure it was a major war crime.

Certainly Silver, he of the 90 percent chance of Obama prevailing, along with many pollsters and political savants, had a great deal riding on the outcome. The rough consensus going into Election Day was pretty much that the popular vote would be close but the math suggested the president would be reelected. Imagine the anti-media outcry from conservatives if Romney had pulled it out.

That's unfortunate. But it hardly obviates that valuable work. Even if politicians think there's no price to be paid for ignoring the referees, it's important for journalists to check the facts and reach conclusions as a service to the citizens who care.

Less healthy was the penchant of the political media to tirelessly flog the gaffe or distraction du jour or du moment, a byproduct of the 24/7 news cycle and the obsession of political journalists with "winning the morning." There was no shortage of silliness this time around. But I suspect this kind of stuff, while no doubt of great interest to the Insider the Beltway political insiders, has little impact on the vast majority of voters.